 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
 |
 |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Report No. 140 2.9. Effect of pre-1976 amendment.- It is important to repeal that in none of the amendments made before 1976 (locally or other wise) regarding service by registered post of summons issued by the court, there was any mandatory provision directing the court to declare that the summons (issued by registered post and received back with an endorsement of refusal) had been duly served on the defendant. Even rule 20A (now deleted in 1976, as a consequential amendment) did not make such a provision. It was the 1976 amendment which created such a position.1 1. Chapter III, infra.    |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
|||||||||
Back